1. What is this?

A high-level, very casual, and often self-deprecating look at trends in catches of Tyee salmon in Campbell River’s legendary Tyee Pool. All data exploration is being completed for fun and to learn some new tools (namely R Markdown and plotly).

There are far more technical ways of examining this data, but they aren’t as much fun - and are frankly hard. This analysis is living and will evolve over time. All results and interpretation are purely speculative and should be considered nothing more than ramblings of a fish nerd.

Normally this is where I would put pictures of all the beautiful Tyee I have captured, but that hasn’t happened yet. So far, these are the best things I have managed to get in my boat

## [1] FALSE

1.1 The Data

I have compiled the following datasets to use in this analysis. Whether they are all incorporated is yet to be seen.

  1. Annual catch records from the Tyee Club.
  2. Angling effort and undersize fish catches from Tyee Club yearbooks (2019 to 2022).
  3. Discharge data collected on the Campbell River by the Water Survey of Canada.
  4. Annual Chinook Salmon escapement data available in the DFO NuSEDS database.
  5. Annual catch statistics from the North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission.
  6. Area based commercial catch statistics from DFO are available from 2001 to 2016
  7. Straight of Georgia herring spawn and catch data.
  8. Southeast Alaska commercial catch data from North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission.
  9. Hatchery release statistics from North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission.
  10. Known ocean ranges of Pacific Salmon and Steelhead stocks
  11. Chinook survival data prepared by Welch et al. 2020

This is certainly an interesting dataset, especially given it is the centenary of the Tyee Club, but it has its limitations. For example, there is no accessible information on effort (# boats per day), biological data (e.g. size, girth and age of tyees) or numbers of non-tyee salmon captured in the pool.

2. Let’s look at the Tyee catch data!

There are lots of ways to look at this data. I am most curious about three things:

  1. How total catches vary among years and if they fluctuate relative to escapement.

  2. When are Tyees most frequently captured?

  3. Has fish size changed across seasons? Does fish size vary within seasons?

2.1 Total catches across years.

Figure 1: Trends in Tyee Salmon captures and Campbell River Chinook Salmon escapement.

A quick look at Tyee catches (blue vertical bars) in Figure 1 shows:

  1. There is a fairly clear 4-year cycle of relatively higher catches (highlighted with shading). Which is interesting, and raises lots of questions…
  2. There has been a consistent decline in the number of Tyee salmon captured per year.
  3. There was a major crash or failure in 2014.

If we look at Escapement data (blue line) shown in Figure 1 , we can see:

  1. There has been a general declining trend in escapement (consistent with regional trends),
  2. Periods of increased escapement correspond with periods of increased Tyee catches, but not always (e.g. 2005, 2017 and 2020). Given the lack of information on effort (e.g. # of boats fishing per day) we cannot tease apart whether the lack of catches in some years is due to reduction in pressure.
  3. It is also possible that years with high escapement and low Tyee numbers were due to an increased proportion of smaller fish returning to the Campbell. Without annual information on age structure I cannot tease this apart.

Now, lets see when fish are most frequently captured throughout the season, and if there has been a change over time.

2.2 Cumulative catches per year.

Let’s take a look at how cumulative catches compare within decades.

Figure 2: Cumulative tally of Tyee’s captured by decade.

Lots of variability in total catches per year across the decade, but overall mean catches per decade are decreasing steadily from ~47 in 2000’s, to ~27 in 2010’s and 19 in 2020’s.

2.3 Effort and catches of undersize fish.

The Tyee club weighmaster has been recording the number of boats fishing morning, noon and evening tides, as well as the number of undersize fish captured throughout the season. This data has been recorded for ~8’ish years, however, data is only publicaly available from 2019 onwards.

Table 1. Summary of undersize catches and effort from 2019 to 2022.
# Fish Captured
Mean Capture Probability
Year Tyee Undersize Total Total Boats Tyee Undersize Overall
2019 13 181 194 2204 0.317% 4.09% 4.41%
2020 14 108 122 2337 0.300% 2.82% 3.12%
2021 36 210 246 2461 0.747% 5.75% 6.49%
2022 6 86 92 2136 0.113% 2.10% 2.21%

2.4 When fish are most frequently captured.

The Tyee season runs from July 15 to September 15. I need to pick my battles with my wife and boss. Let’s see which days I should be fighting for!?

2.4.1 First Tyee of the Year

Let’s see when the first Tyee are most frequently captured each season. Alright, looks like I should have fished tonight (August 1) and need to fish August 6. Note that values for August 2 and August 7 are somewhat misleading as the plot is showing the number of fish captured on opening day.

Figure 3: Number of Tyee captured on date when first Tyee is registered.

2.4.2 When the most Tyee’s are captured each year.

Figure 4: Total fish captured by date and decade

This plot will become a lot more interesting once I can get my hands on some historical data. But for now, we can see:

  • People either do not fish, or do not catch fish before late July/early August. Given the way catches increase through August I am thinking it is the latter.
  • Peak catches occur in mid to late August.
  • August 18-19 is a must fish kind of day.
  • Good luck on July 30.

OK, well now we know not to bother fishing until early August, that I should book the off the last 3 weeks of August and that odds are that 2023 is not going to set a new record for most Tyee’s captured. But who knows.

2.5 Does fish size vary within or between seasons?

Figure 5: Mean annual weight of Tyee Salmon captured since 2002.

So overall mean fish size is relatively consistent across years. That’s good news, but maybe there are better ways to look at this data. Bar plots can be deceptive.

Figure 5: Mean annual weight of Tyee Salmon captured since 2002.

Well that is a bit better. The overall mean size of Tyee has stayed relatively stable across years, which makes sense given there is a minimum size limit for Tyee - but there also appears to fewer bigger fish being captured each year.

Figure 6: Weight of Tyee salmon caught per day since 2002.

What a mess. Pretty hard to identify any relationships from that figure.

2.5.1 Historic fish size trends.

Historic catch record data is available back to 1923, but only for newly registered members. So any fish captured by existing members are excluded. Either way, the data set still includes over 2880 records and offers a peak into the historic size range of fish captured in the Tyee pool.

If we plot the mean weight for each year we get the figure below which shows a fairly strong decreasing trend in fish size since about 1950.

Figure 7: Mean annual weight and SE of all fish recorded in the record book since 1923.

Given the variability in the number of fish that were captured each year, lets try to standardize the process by selecting a random sample of 10 fish from each year (or all fish if less than 10 were registered in a year). This produces the figure below. Which also shows a strong decreasing trend in fish size since the late 1940’s and early 1950’s.

Figure 8: Mean annual weight and SE of 10 randomly selected fish recorded in the record book since 1923.

2.6 Daily catches per year.

To round this out, let’s just have a look at the total number of fish caught per day over the past 20 years.

Figure 4: Total fish captured by date and decade

Without additional data there is not much else to look at. So let’s change gears and start poking around at what may be contributing to observed patterns in catches and size.

2.7 Who’s who in the zoo?

Let’s have a look at who has been catching the most fish! First we will look at who has caught the most fish in the past 5 years, then we will have a look at all the data.

. .
Table 2. Number of fish captured and rowed by anglers and guides since 2018.
Total Tyee
Tyee Rowed
Tyee Angled
Member Rank (Rowed + Angled) 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total
Mike Stutzel 1 17 1 1 1 5 2 4 14 1 1 0 1 0 0 3
Peter Wipper 2 7 0 0 1 2 1 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Mike Dougan 3 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maegen Dougan 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 5
Mike Newton 4 5 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 3
Mike Mackie 6 4 2 1 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Paul Curtis 6 4 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 2
Paul Pearson 6 4 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Bob Main 9 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Bruce Herkes 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 2
Darla Hunt 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3
Floyd Ross 9 3 0 1 1 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jim Clowes 9 3 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Mark Thulin 9 3 1 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nathon Miller 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 3
R.D. Berger 9 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Randy Killoran 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Reid Herkes 9 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Trevor Gains 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Yari Ivanisko 9 3 1 0 1 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Brett Gardner 21 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Burt Campbell 21 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Greg Askey 21 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
John Woodward 21 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Jules LaCroix 21 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Karen Hutton 21 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2
Ken Enns 21 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ken Mar 21 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
Mark Trenholm 21 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Morris Trace 21 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ric Dionne 21 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Richard Holman 21 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Rick Janzen 21 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rick Joubert 21 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rob Austin 21 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Roma Boutilier 21 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2
Steve Spiers 21 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tim Hanika 21 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2
Tyson Berkenstock 21 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Walter Stutzel 21 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2
Allyn Harvey 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Amaro Lozano 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Andrew Rippingale 41 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aren Knudsen 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
Ben Campbell 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Beth Newton 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Betty Gage 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Bob Barrett 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Bob Joseph 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Brady Thulin 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Brodie Doherty 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Bruce Aikmen 41 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Bruce Preston 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Bryan Rickert 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Carole Beaudoin 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Chris Nicholas 41 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chris Sheilds 41 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Clayton Stoner 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Cyena McIntosh 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
Dan Hatch 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
Dan Heaven 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Darrell Mustard 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Dave Lavigne 41 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dave Ludvigson 41 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dave Nutt 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Dave Soper 41 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
David Duke 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
David Nutt 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
David Richter 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
Davin Saunders 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Dawn Hamilton 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Diana Clowes 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Don Syroid 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Doug Ellis 41 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dustin Marsh 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Dwayne Mustard 41 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dyson Ivanisko 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Forrest Owens 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Gary Lawson 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Gary Soles 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
George Deagle 41 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gerald Hinsberger 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Glen McIntosh 41 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Grant Rosswarne 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Grayden McInnes 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Greg Main 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Jaret Knowles 41 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jeremy Maynard 41 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Joe Boutilier 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
John Bentham 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
John Chalmers 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
John Plant 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
John Todd 41 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Judy Janzen 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Kalla Shields 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Kalyn Sutherland 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
Karren Hutton 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Ken Duke 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Klaus Weger 41 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Landon Mackie 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Laurie York 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
Lisa Nicholas 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
MacKenzie Collins 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mark Lagos 41 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mike Hamilton 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Miles Latrace 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Monique Weeks 41 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Montagu Lee 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Nathan Boutilier 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Nathan Lagos 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
Paula Davies 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Raeya Mackie 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Reaya Mackie 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Reg Mackenzie 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Rich Fryer 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Rick Hackinen 41 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rick Tillapaugh 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Rob Turko 41 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Robi Gareau 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Roger Gage 41 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ross Spiers 41 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rowen Berkey 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Roy Grant 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ryan Newton 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Sarah Deagle 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Scott Laird 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Sean Batty 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Shane Roberts 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Terry Blasco 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Tim Samuels 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Tom Hooge 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
Trevor Erickson 41 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Troy Perras 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Trygg Carlson 41 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

A total of 80 fish have been registered since 2020, or which Mike Stutzel has captured 13 or 16%. In the current dataset, nobody has stats like that! Randy caught (rowed or angled) the most fish in the 2000’s (n = 23 of 384 registered) and 2010’s (n = 15 of 268 registered), but his fish represent 6% of the total catch in each decade. Mike, if you read this and feel like rowing around some deadweight give me a shout!

Note though that this summary does not include Tyee that were recorded but not registered (e.g. fish captured or released by non-registered anglers).

Table 3. Number of fish captured and rowed by anglers and guides who have caught more than 5 Tyee, per decade since 2002.
Total Tyee
Tyee Rowed
Tyee Angled
Member Rank (Rowed + Angled) 2000’s 2010’s 2020’s Total 2000’s 2010’s 2020’s Total
Randy Killoran 1 41 23 15 2 40 0 0 1 1
Ken Mar 2 33 22 6 1 29 3 0 1 4
R.D. Berger 3 28 20 7 0 27 0 0 1 1
Paul Curtis 4 26 14 4 2 20 4 0 2 6
Jeremy Maynard 5 24 16 8 0 24 0 0 0 0
John Woodward 6 23 11 5 1 17 4 2 0 6
Ross Spiers 7 22 12 9 1 22 0 0 0 0
Chris Plamondon 8 20 11 1 0 12 8 0 0 8
Mike Mackie 8 20 5 13 1 19 1 0 0 1
Roy Grant 8 20 12 7 1 20 0 0 0 0
Mike Stutzel 11 19 0 3 12 15 0 3 1 4
Reid Herkes 11 19 13 4 1 18 0 0 1 1
Peter Wipper 13 18 1 9 6 16 1 0 1 2
Jim Clowes 14 17 9 5 2 16 0 1 0 1
Norm Lee 15 16 8 5 0 13 1 2 0 3
Floyd Ross 16 15 4 3 2 9 4 2 0 6
Ken Enns 16 15 5 3 1 9 5 1 0 6
Bill Tomicki 18 14 0 0 0 0 9 5 0 14
John Barker 18 14 5 4 0 9 2 3 0 5
Shara Berger 18 14 0 0 0 0 13 1 0 14
Burt Campbell 21 13 5 4 2 11 2 0 0 2
Mike Kauertz 21 13 2 4 0 6 5 2 0 7
Mark Thulin 23 12 2 8 2 12 0 0 0 0
Paul Breukers 23 12 9 1 0 10 2 0 0 2
Brant Peniuk 25 11 8 1 0 9 2 0 0 2
Peter Kruse 25 11 10 1 0 11 0 0 0 0
Tim Samuels 25 11 0 0 0 0 6 4 1 11
Troy Winslow 25 11 1 0 0 1 7 3 0 10
Jules LaCroix 29 10 0 3 0 3 0 7 0 7
Klaus Weger 29 10 3 6 0 9 0 1 0 1
Travis Trace 29 10 6 1 0 7 3 0 0 3
Bill Idiens 32 9 5 1 0 6 2 1 0 3
Chris Cook 32 9 2 2 0 4 3 2 0 5
Fred Gerl 32 9 1 4 0 5 2 2 0 4
Lisa Woodward 32 9 0 0 0 0 5 4 0 9
Dale Kashuba 36 8 0 0 0 0 1 7 0 8
Gene Berkey 36 8 7 1 0 8 0 0 0 0
Joe Painter 36 8 2 3 0 5 1 2 0 3
Monique Weeks 36 8 4 2 0 6 2 0 0 2
Morris Trace 36 8 3 1 2 6 2 0 0 2
Dale Blackburn 41 7 3 2 0 5 2 0 0 2
Neil Cameron 41 7 6 1 0 7 0 0 0 0
Bruce Herkes 43 6 2 0 1 3 1 1 1 3
Greg Askey 43 6 0 1 1 2 0 3 1 4
Harry Thulin 43 6 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 6
Mike Dougan 43 6 0 2 4 6 0 0 0 0
Peter Winter 43 6 3 3 0 6 0 0 0 0
Phil Griffith 43 6 1 3 0 4 2 0 0 2
Sean Kiley 43 6 5 1 0 6 0 0 0 0
Ted Milbrandt 43 6 2 4 0 6 0 0 0 0
Yari Ivanisko 43 6 0 4 2 6 0 0 0 0
A.J. Larsen 52 5 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0
Bob Main 52 5 0 2 0 2 0 3 0 3
Brett Gardner 52 5 0 1 2 3 0 2 0 2
Bruce Aikmen 52 5 2 3 0 5 0 0 0 0
Darrell Knowles 52 5 3 1 0 4 1 0 0 1
Dave Hadden 52 5 2 3 0 5 0 0 0 0
Dean Bell 52 5 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 5
Karen D’Alessandro 52 5 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 5
Ken Fletcher 52 5 4 1 0 5 0 0 0 0
Maegen Dougan 52 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 5
Mike Netzel 52 5 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 5
Mike Newton 52 5 0 0 2 2 0 0 3 3
Paula Davies 52 5 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 5
Ric Dionne 52 5 1 0 2 3 2 0 0 2
Rick Janzen 52 5 0 4 1 5 0 0 0 0
Robert Hobbs 52 5 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 5
Robin Modesto 52 5 0 3 0 3 0 2 0 2
Stuart Wolfe 52 5 2 0 0 2 3 0 0 3

Looks like I need to try to get on with Randy Killoran too!

So nobody feels left out, here is a summary of all fish registered since 2002.

Table 4. Number of fish captured and rowed by anglers and guides who have caught less than 5 Tyee, per decade since
2002.
Total Tyee
Tyee Rowed
Tyee Angled
Member Rank (Rowed + Angled) 2000’s 2010’s 2020’s Total 2000’s 2010’s 2020’s Total
Andrew Rippingale 70 4 1 2 1 4 0 0 0 0
Bill Herkes 70 4 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 0
Bill Ostler 70 4 0 1 0 1 2 1 0 3
Brian Isfeld 70 4 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4
Bruce Walton 70 4 3 0 0 3 1 0 0 1
Corinne Wolfe 70 4 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4
Darcey Houser 70 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4
Dick Knowles 70 4 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 2
Don Swoboda 70 4 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 4
James Wolfe 70 4 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4
John Todd 70 4 0 3 0 3 0 1 0 1
Justin Horsman 70 4 0 3 0 3 1 0 0 1
Karin Plamondon 70 4 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4
Mark Lagos 70 4 0 3 1 4 0 0 0 0
Paul Pearson 70 4 0 0 2 2 0 0 2 2
Sean Kelly 70 4 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 4
Shauna Schmitke 70 4 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 2
Shauna Towriss 70 4 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 4
Steve Spiers 70 4 0 3 1 4 0 0 0 0
Todd Peachey 70 4 0 2 0 2 2 0 0 2
Troy Perras 70 4 0 3 0 3 0 0 1 1
Bob Joseph 91 3 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 1
Brady Thulin 91 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3
Brian Kruse 91 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3
Brigid Pomeroy 91 3 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 3
Chris Gauthier 91 3 1 1 0 2 1 0 0 1
Darcy Gerhard 91 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3
Darla Hunt 91 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
Dave Soper 91 3 0 1 1 2 0 1 0 1
Don McPhee 91 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3
Doug Ellis 91 3 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0
Ed Fellbaum 91 3 1 1 0 2 1 0 0 1
Gary Soles 91 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3
George Minosky 91 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3
George Reifel Jr.  91 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3
Joe Watson 91 3 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0
John Chalmers 91 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3
Karen Hutton 91 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3
Kevin Gunning 91 3 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 0
Landon Mackie 91 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3
Larry Dougan 91 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3
Matthew Blackburn 91 3 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 1
Mike Benjestorf 91 3 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0
Mike Patterson 91 3 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 2
Mike Rankin 91 3 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0
Nathon Miller 91 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3
Rick Hackinen 91 3 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 0
Roger Barriault 91 3 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 2
Roger Gage 91 3 0 2 0 2 0 1 0 1
Sharon Fisher 91 3 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 3
Steve Babcock 91 3 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 0
Steve Clayton 91 3 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 3
Stuart Haigh 91 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3
Trevor Gains 91 3 0 0 2 2 0 0 1 1
Walter Schoenfelder 91 3 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0
Al Frumento 125 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
Anthony Mar 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Ben Campbell 125 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2
Bill Cosulich 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
Bob Hammond 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Bradley Mah 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Bruce Kirby 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Bruce Middleton 125 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2
Carole Beaudoin 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2
Carter Coblenz 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
Chad Atkinson 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Chel Bassoni 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
Chris Brotherston 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Chris Nicholas 125 2 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0
Clyde Bergendahl 125 2 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1
Dan Plamondon 125 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1
Daniel Bell 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Dave Ludvigson 125 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1
Dave Wardell 125 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
David Davis 125 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2
David Duke 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2
David Stover 125 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
Deb Idiens 125 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2
Debra Herkes 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Dick Patterson 125 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
Don Hutchison 125 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
Edward Painter 125 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
Ernest Anderson 125 2 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1
Gary Brettnacher 125 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
Geoff Bertram 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
George Reifel Sr.  125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Gerald Hinsberger 125 2 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0
Gordon Berkey 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Gordon Dawson 125 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
Gordon Gerl 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
Gordon Killoran 125 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
Graham Rawlins 125 2 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1
Harley Plamondon 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Harold Larson 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Jan Brettnacher 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Jeff Morrison 125 2 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1
Jeff Spence 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Jeremy Bell 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Jim Spiers 125 2 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0
Joe Boutilier 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
Joe Cameron 125 2 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0
John Cronkite 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
John Duncan 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
John Simson 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Judy Janzen 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
Ken Duke 125 2 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0
Ken E. Enns 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
Kevin Chase 125 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
Kevin McAughtrie 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Kim Prystupa 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Kurt Franz 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Lee Deslauriers 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
Leonard Steingarten 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Mark Murphy 125 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
Mark Trenholm 125 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0
Martin Buchanan 125 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0
Mathew Blackburn 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Mickey Kiley 125 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1
Mike Hamilton 125 2 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0
Mike Mcmann 125 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2
Mike Tomczyk 125 2 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1
Mike Woods 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Nathan Lagos 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2
Parker Wong 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Pat Dodman 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Pat Kiley 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Paul McDonald 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
Rich Chapple 125 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
Richard Gage 125 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0
Richard Holman 125 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1
Rick Gunn 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
Rick Joubert 125 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0
Roanne Dunbar 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Rob Austin 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
Rob Saunders 125 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0
Roma Boutilier 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2
Scott Babcock 125 2 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0
Scott Laird 125 2 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1
Steve Sharkey 125 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
Steve Smith 125 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
Steve W. Smith 125 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
Steve Webber 125 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
Tim Breukers 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Tim Hanika 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
Tony Peniuk 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Tyson Berkenstock 125 2 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0
Walter Stutzel 125 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
Wendy Reifel 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Yael Woodward 125 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Aaron Boles 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Aaron Coulter 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Al D’Alessandro 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Alex Benjestorf 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Allyn Harvey 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Amaro Lozano 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Andre Paquin 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Andy Beech 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Anita Painter 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Aren Knudsen 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Aron Lee 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Ashley Campbell 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Barry Hamilton 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Barry Watchorn 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Benard Simoneau 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Beth Newton 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Betty Gage 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Bill Monaghan 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Bill Ridge 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Blair Belton 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Blair Howell 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Bob Barrett 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Bob Hall 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Bob Hirte 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Bob Mitchell 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Brenda Gunn 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Brenda McGovern 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Brent Marin 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Britt Hilton 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Brodie Doherty 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Bruce Preston 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Bryan Rickert 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Bryce Cockburn 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Burton Wright 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Cameron Trace 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Carol Beaudoin 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Carol Seable 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Cathy Moulton 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Celeste Howard 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Chad Mergaert 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Chad Prystupa 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Charlene Murphy 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Chris Fawbert 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Chris Perreault 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Chris Plamondon  219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Chris Sheilds 219 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
Cindy King 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Clayton Stoner 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Cliff Doerksen 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Constance Kretz 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Cory Albrecht 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Cyena McIntosh 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Dan Babchuck 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Dan Hatch 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Dan Heaven 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Dan Hryhoryshen 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Dan York 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Daphne Frost 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Darrel Tomlinson 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Darrell Mustard 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Daryl Mackie 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Dave Clarke 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Dave Gilson 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Dave Lavigne 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Dave Mackie 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Dave Nutt 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Dave Roemer 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Dave White 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
David Ewart 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
David Nutt 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
David Richter 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Davin Saunders 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Dawn Hamilton 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Dean Benjestorf 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Del Kyle 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Denise Mitchell 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Diana Clowes 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Diane Moore 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Dick Nakamura 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Don Nicholas 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Don Poty 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Don Syroid 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Donna Garber 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Doug Rippingale 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Doug Robinson 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Drews Driessen-Van Der Lieck 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Dustin Marsh 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Dwayne Mustard 219 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
Dwayne Smith 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Dyson Ivanisko 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Ed Henri 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Ed Hinkey 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Ed Sharkey 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Ed Walker 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Elise Mah 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Eric Baikie 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Eric Christian 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Eric Cooper-Smith 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Eric Mainprize 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Eugene Berkey 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Eugene Titus 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Evan Hughes 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Forrest Owens 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Frances Cowen 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Francois Charron 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Frank Grasmann 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Frank Green 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Frank Greens 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Gael Arthur 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Gail McIntosh 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Garry Smith 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Gary Lawson 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Gary Phillips 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Gary Scales 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Gary Stotts 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Gary Tietzmann 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Gaylia Meitzen 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Geary Putt 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Gene Kneece 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Geordie Dunstan 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
George Deagle 219 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
Gerry Mathiasen 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Ginny Harrington 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Glen Johnson 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Glen McIntosh 219 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
Glenn Grycan 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Gordon Chu 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Gordon Cockburn 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Graeme Bull 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Grant Luscombe 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Grant Rosswarne 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Grayden McInnes 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Greg Main 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Harry Hemphill 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Heather Cornfield 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Hilford Burton 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Holly Davis 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Ian Murphy 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Ivan Ferenc 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Jack Isbister 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
James Newman 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Jan Debruyn 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Jane Campbell 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Janeen Griffith 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Janice Tanche 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Janice Thorburn 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Jaret Knowles 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Jason Dault 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Jeff Forsythe 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Jeremy Morrow 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Jerry Strelioff 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Jim Busselle 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Jim Dodd 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Jim Mitchell 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Joel Dunstan 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Joey Coello 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
John Bentham 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
John Mannion 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
John Payne 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
John Plant 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
John Robinson 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Judi Spiers 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Judy Herder 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Julian Lee 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Julie Glaspy 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Justin Miller 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Justin Nairn 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Kalla Shields 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Kalyn Sutherland 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Karen Edinger 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Karin Maier 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Karl Kirkham 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Karren Hutton 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Kathy Klaus 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Ken Hamer 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Ken Kishiuchi 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Ken Murakami 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Ken Whiddington 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Ken Wilson 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Kent Moeller 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Keony Magnan 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Kevin May 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Kevin Winiski 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Kim Cornfield 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Laine McCarthy 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Lanett Barker 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Larry Dalziel 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Laurie York 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Lawrence Ranger 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Lee Watson 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Leeann Kruse 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Leslie Stapley 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Linda Barrett 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Lindsay Laverdure 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Lisa Nicholas 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Liz Cookson 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Lyle Unwin 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
MacKenzie Collins 219 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
Mark Dobos 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Mark Gage 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Mary McKim 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Mathias Mueller 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Maureen Dionne 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Michael Hives 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Michael Moscovich 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Mick Pomeroy 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Mike Finn 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Mike Gage 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Mike Ives 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Miles Latrace 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Montagu Lee 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Myriam Belisle 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Nathan Boutilier 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Neil McLennan 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Norman Poole 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Owen Lagos 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Pat Jeffrey 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Pat Nelson 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Patty Brown 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Paul Brown 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Pelle Wybenga 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Perry Desbois 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Peter Britain 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Phil MacNeill 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Phil Vanbourgondien 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Phillip MacNeil 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Quentin Dodd 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Quinn Small 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Racho Jordanov 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Raeya Mackie 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Ray Barriault Jr.  219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Reaya Mackie 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Reenie Wolfe 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Reg Mackenzie 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Reid Mitchell 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Rich Fryer 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Richard Baker 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Richard Cuddeford 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Richard Johns 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Rick Dionne 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Rick Eriksen 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Rick Sambrook 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Rick Tillapaugh 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Rob King 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Rob MacDougall 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Rob Nugent 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Rob Rowden 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Rob Spiers 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Rob Turko 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Robi Gareau 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Roland Hilton 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Ron Gunn 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Ron Herder 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Ron Perkins 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Ross Whitmore 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Rowen Berkey 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Roy Dunbar 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Russel Sawchyn 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Russell Motion 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Ruth Heck 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Ryan Brown 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Ryan MacPhee-Gerl 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Ryan Newton 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Sally Kerr 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Sally Rickert 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Sarah Deagle 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Sayer Roberts 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Scott Campbell 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Scott Isbister 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Sean Batty 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Sean Rankin 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Shamra McClellan 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Shane Roberts 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Sheila Barriault 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Shirley Briley 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Shirley Murray 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Sonny Boon 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Sophie Cameron 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Stanley Harkof 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Stephanie Sprout 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Stephen Isbister 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Stephen Notley 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Steve Mitchell 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Steve Quintrell 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Steve Vandop 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Sue Berger 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
TJ Nelson 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Tanner Stolle 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Ted Maynard 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Tejay Delcasino 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Teresa Robinson 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Terri Sambrook 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Terry Blasco 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Terry Carr 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Terry Sambrook 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Tim Gudewill 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Todd Beadle 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Todd Campbell 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Todd Stewardson 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Tom Barrow 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Tom Dennis 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Tom Hooge 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Tom Kirkham 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Tony Anderson 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Tony Harvey 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Travis Uzzell 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Trevor Erickson 219 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Trygg Carlson 219 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
Warren Barker 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Warren Howe 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Wes Sewell 219 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Will Duguid 219 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Will Stout 219 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

3. What do we know about CR Chinook?

(* more like what have others learned about Chinook in the Campbell, I don’t know much).

There has been a lot of information collected on Campbell River Chinook Salmon, including from Tyee Salmon captured in the Tyee Pool, however, most of this data is not readily available online. Data that is available (and that I have found) is summarized below. Data and study results from other systems have also been included for comparison and emphasis.

3.1. Quinsam vs. Campbell

  • The vast majority of Chinook Salmon returning to the Campbell River system are from the Quinsam River. Based on available escapement data for both systems, a mean of 12.5% Chinook returning to the system are from the Campbell River (varies from 6% to 25% between 1991 and 2019).

Figure 9: Chinook Salmon escpaement in the Campbell and Quinsam rivers from 1991 to 2021.

3.2 Tyee Club Data (presented by Campbell River Salmon Foundation)

  • The origin of fish captured in the tyee pool was determined by examining coded wire tags in adipose clipped fish and otoliths in non-clipped fish captured between 2015-2018 CRSF 2018. This data suggests the majority of captured fish in the pool (including undersize) are from the Quinsam Hatchery (mean = 61% across all years), followed by the Discovery Passage Seapens (mean = 17% across all years). The remaining 6% of fish are intercepted on route to natal streams (e.g. Big Qualicum, Nitinat, Washington State hatcheries).

  • Despite 79% of all captured fish having an adipose fin, only 16% were actually wild and not of hatchery origin. Meaning most hatchery fish were not visually marked (but did have thermal otolith marking), which is not surprising given resources required for fin clipping.

  • Ages calculated from a subset of otoliths of fish captured in the tyee pool between 2015-2018 (n = 48) shows that the majority of fish are Age-4 (overall mean = 75%), followed by Age-5 (17%) and Age-3 (8%). No Age-6 fish were identified in the sub-sample of heads that were aged.

  • Of the 350 fish captured in the Tyee pool between 2015 and 2018, 26% were Tyee salmon (n = 90). However, this varied between years with Tyee representing 18% to 32% of all fish captured between years.

3.2 Spawn Timing

  • Chinook spawning occurs from late September through early November and peaks in mid-October. Spawners typically reside in the river for ~12 days.

3.3 Age Class Structure

  • A roughly equal proportion of spawners return to the Campbell River as age-4 and age-5 fish (see Table 1) Sturham et al. 1999. Very few fish return as Age-6 (1% (1 of 99 fish) of Campbell River fish in Sturham dataset.

  • However, Ewart & Anderson,2013 report that Age-5 fish were dominant in 2012 (61%), with Age-4’s accounting for only 37% of the run, and age-3’s representing only 2%. Age-6 fish were absent from the 2013 dataset.

3.4 Size-at-Age

  • I have not found any measures of individual fish. But binned data from Sturham et al. 1999 (see Table 1) shows that Age-3 fish were between 500 mm and 699 mm (mean = 595 mm), Age-4 fish generally range in size from 550-949 mm (mean ~ 780 mm) and age-5 fish range from 700-949 mm (mean ~ 840 mm). Age-6 fish were identified, but accounted for less than 1% of all fish in the Campbell (n = 1 fish, 930 mm).
  • Fish in the Quinsam River are comparable in size to those in the Campbell, though hatchery fish generally return at a smaller size than their wild counterparts in the Campbell and Quinsam. Sturham et al. (1999) data suggest Age-4 and Age-5 wild fish may exceed 900 mm, while only Age-5 hatchery fish are likely to exceed 900 mm.
Table 4. Size at age of Chinook Salmon captured in Campbell River watershed from Sturham et al. 1999
Waterbody Age n % of Total Size Range <br>(mm) Mean Lenght <br>(mm)
Campbell River 3 6 7.8947368 500 - 699 595.0
Campbell River 4 34 44.7368421 550 - 949 779.5
Campbell River 5 35 46.0526316 700 - 949 842.5
Campbell River 6 1 1.3157895 900 - 949 930.0
Quinsam Hatchery 3 76 20.2127660 400 - 749 619.5
Quinsam Hatchery 4 225 59.8404255 550 - 899 743.5
Quinsam Hatchery 5 73 19.4148936 700 - 949 834.0
Quinsam Hatchery 6 2 0.5319149 750 - 849 784.0
Quinsam River 3 46 22.7722772 500 - 849 663.0
Quinsam River 4 114 56.4356436 550 - 949 733.5
Quinsam River 5 40 19.8019802 700 - 949 818.0
Quinsam River 6 2 0.9900990 800 - 849 838.0

Interesting side notes on recent studies examining trends in size of Chinook salmon.

  • Lewis et al. 2015 report that the size and age of Chinook returning to Alaska over the past 30-years has been decreasing and speculate that size-selective fisheries may be driving earlier maturation and declines in size (emphasis on speculate, they also point out that marine conditions and competition could produce similar results).
  • Ohlberger et al. 2018 built on this work and showed that there has been a reduction in the proportion of older Chinook age classes throughout most regions of the East Pacific and that length-at-age of older fish has decreased while length-at-age of smaller fish has increased.
  • Oke et al. 2020 state that relative to salmon maturing before 1990, adult Chinook salmon now produce 16% fewer eggs, transport 28% less nutrients and have lost 21% of their fisheries value.
  • Malick et al. 2023 reviewed 25 years of broodstock data from 43 hatcheries and found evidence of a significant reduction in length (and fecundity).

3.5 Fecundity

  • According to Ewart & Anderson (2013), female Chinook returning to the Campbell River in 2012 carried roughly ~5,700, a decrease from the roughly 6,000 eggs typically carried.

  • Decreasing fecundity rates have also been reported in larger studies. For example, Malick et al. 2023 compiled 2.5 decades worth of broodstock data from 43 hatcheries to examine trends in fecundity. They found significant declines in fecundity (and length), with the greatest drop in fecundity occurring over the past decade. This reduction in fecundity was primarily explained by a reduction in the size of spawners. Not particularly relevant, but they also estimate that a 1 mm reduction in length results in ~7.8 few eggs per female

3.6 Juvenile Life History

  • Juvenile Chinook Salmon in the Campbell River have been studied intensively since 2015 (e.g. Thornton et al. 2022. These data suggest fry emerge in February-March and that nearly all Campbell River Chinook out migrate as Age-0+ juveniles from March through July. Smaller recently emerged Age-0+ fry are dominant and typically captured from March through early May (37 to 52 m). The remaining fish emigrate as slightly larger Age-0+ smolts (~64 to 88 mm) from May through July.

3.7 Estimated Juvenile Production

  • Estimates of juvenile Chinook production based on numbers of observed spawners have generally been less than numbers trapped throughout the out-migration period (Thornton et al. 2022), suggesting juvenile survival rates may be above average (e.g. >10%).

  • Juvenile survival was very low in both 2014 and 2016, which may be due to unusually high flows during spawning and/or incubation periods in each year.

3.8 Estimates of Marine Survival

  • Marine survival of unfed fry released from the Quinsam hatchery range from 0.2% to 0.4% (yes, that is less than 1%) (Ewart & Anderson 2013).

  • However, based on data from Welch et al. 2020, survival of coded wire tagged chinook in the Quinsam ranged from a low of 0.056% in 2007 to a high of 3.3% in 1977, with an overall mean of 0.74%. Mean survival since 2000 is lower (0.28%, 0.56% to 0.56%). These estimates are generally within the range of other hatchery released sub-yearling populations within the straight of Georgia (see image below using data from Welch et al. 2020).

Figure 10: Survival of coded wire tagged Chinook sub-yearlings (Age-0 upon release) released from hatcheries throughout the Strait of Georgia, including the Quinsam River. Note that y-axis is log transformed to better see range of values (labels are actual values). Figure prepared using data prepared by Welch et al. 2020

  • Welch et al. 2018 used coded-wire tag data to look at large scale patterns of Chinook salmon survival. This data demonstrates that survival collapsed over the past half century by a factor of ~3 and is currently ~1% in many regions (consistent with estimates available for the Campbell). Survival in relatively pristine and undeveloped regions (e.g. Northern BC and Alaska) was comparable to areas with extensive water management and land development that were previously considered to have poorest survival (e.g. Columbia River). The authors suggest the widespread trends in survival may be evidence that marine conditions are more influential than local factors (e.g. freshwater habitat).

  • Similar trends have been observed in other species. For example, Price et al. 2021 found a 69% reduction in wild Sockeye salmon returns (though overall returns are comparable to historic levels due to intensive enhancement); that population diversity has decreased by ~70%, and; that life history diversity has shifted with populations now migrating from freshwater earlier and remaining at sea for longer.

3.9 Catch and Release Mortality

When a fish is hooked, it undergoes stress and physiological responses which vary by species, sex and even fish size (see [Patterson et al. 2017]https://www.fecpl.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/CSAS-FRIM-RESDOC-A-2017_010-eng.pdf) for a fantastic review of exactly what happens to a fish when it is being captured and how different factors such as species, sex, condition, water quality, predators etc. may influence mortality rates). While working with David Patterson, Steve Cooke and Scott Hinch’s teams on this study I developed an analogy to try to convey what a fish experiences when it is captured. It’s intentionally dramatic and usually goes something like this:

  • Consider a situation where you are walking down the street, you see a street vendor with a sign that says free donuts. The donuts look kinda funny but you are hungry and really like donuts, so you decide to take one. As you take your first bite you feel a shooting pain through your face and your mouth fills with blood. You have been hooked by the donut vendor and he is trying to pull you into a dark grungy alley. You obviously freak out, you yell and scream and try to sprint away as fast as you can. But you can’t break free, you are able to pull some rope out of the vendors hands but he eventually pulls it back in. You fight and fight to get away. Your whole body starts to burn because of the lactic acid that has built up from trying to get away. Eventually it is too much. You are exhausted, your muscles stop working and you can no longer fight to get away. You collapse and all you can do is gasp for air. The vendor eagerly drags your exhausted body into the filthy alleyway where he is waiting. He grabs you by the throat and pushes your face into a bucket of water. He holds it there for 0.5 to 3 minutes while he takes pictures he thinks will impress his friends on Facebook. The vendor uses pliers to cut and pull the hook out of your face - being careful not to damage his precious hook or donut. He may decide to put you out of your misery by hitting you in the head with a baseball bat, or he may just take your head out of the bucket and leave you on the ground so he can go entice someone else with his fake donut.

I personally don’t think I would survive this scenario. If I did, survive I would likely not leave my couch for days while I recovered and would be terrified to eat anything. I would also likely eat fewer apple fritters from Steiner’s. Fortunately, fish seem to be stronger and more resilient than me (and there aren’t (m)any donut vendors luring perpetually hungry sugar addicts into dark alleys).

Trying to get an estimate of capture and release mortality is extremely difficult and results from a single study are unlikely to be representative of all areas, fisheries, or seasons. [Cox-Rogers et al. 1999]https://psf.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Download-PDF436-1.pdf completed a review of studies looking at mortality rates of marine captured and released Coho and Chinook in BC, WA, OR and CA. They report:

  • Mortality rates range from ~5% to over 30% and vary by gear type/angling method, fight duration, species, size and age, season and a myriad of other factors and recommend that the estimate of 15% mortality for captured and released Chinook applied across BC is not appropriate as it is not representative of all fisheries, does not include drop-off or long-term mortality. In addition, they state:

  • The authors state that active fisheries (E.g. trolling) are likely to have lower mortality rates than passive fisheries (E.g., mooching).

  • In BC, net pens were used to hold Chinook captured in recreational troll fisheries (using hootchies and flashers on downriggers) for 72 hrs to assess post-release mortality (Gjernes 1990, in Cox-Rogers et al. 1999). They report an overall mortality rates of 9.9%, but showed that mortality was size dependent: with mean mortality of 8.2% for 45-62 cm fish and 13.6% for fish >62 cm. Hooking location appeared to be a major predictor of survival, with lower survival among fish that sustained injuries to major blood vessels associated with gills and heart.

Take-away from this is that post-release mortality rates are likely higher for:

  • Larger fish than smaller fish;
  • Fish that fight to a point of complete exhaustion (vs fish that are captured and released quickly);
  • Fish that spend more time out of water prior to release;
  • Fish that are deep hooked or hooked in the gills.
  • Plus many other factors (season, water temperature, water quality, predator abundance, etc.)

When considered in the context of the Tyee pool, I would expect mortality to be higher than average given the size of fish and light tackle. However, even if mortality is 30%, that is still 70% less than mortality rates for fish that are kept - as Yari says, “100% of bonked fish are dead.” If all Tyee captured to date in the pool had been released it is very likely that there would be more large fish returning to the pool each year. However, switching to a strictly catch and release fishery would require larger conversations about the ethics of harming an animal purely for sport.

3.10 Hatchery Influence and Population Status

  • Ewart & Anderson 2013 report that 56% of the otoliths examined from 2012 spawners showed no signs of hatchery marking and are assumed wild. The remaining 44% are presumed to have originated from instream incubators (31%), seapen released smolts (4%) and Quinsam River released smolts (9%).
  • Assuming data presented by Sturham et al. 1999 is representative of the overall Quinsam population, we can assume hatchery origin fish make up 62% of Age-3 fish, 66% of Age-4 fish, 65 of Age-5 fish and 50% of Age-6 fish.

Interestingly, hatchery releases have never been higher

  • Ruggerone & Irvine 2018 show that intensive enhancement has resulted in the greatest abundance of salmon in the ocean than ever before (specifically pink, sockeye and chum) and that marine carrying capacity may have been reached within recent decades.
  • Nelson et al. 2019 present evidence that hatchery practices have altered size and time that juveniles are released and have reduced diversity of life history traits (e.g. size, age and timing of smoltification). The authors argue that current enhancement practices may release fish at a time and size that is preferred by predators (e.g. all fish being released at same time and size and are easy pickings for large aggregations of predators).

3.11 Ocean Range

  • Tagging studies have shown that maturing Chinook of BC origin are frequently located in Southeast Alaska, the west coast of Haida Gwaii and west and north coasts of Vancouver Island Myers et al. 1996 (see screenshot of map from Myers et al. 1996, below).

screenshot of map.

3.12 Exploitation Rates

  • Approximately 17% of fish released by the Quinsam hatchery are intercepted in Southeast Alaska commercial net (4.99%) and troll fisheries (11.95%) while an additional 1.84% that are intercepted in Alaskan sport fisheries Rosenberger et al.2022.
  • A court ruling in May 2023 almost shut down the 2023 SE Alaska troll fishery. Unfortunately for those aspiring to join the Tyee Club (and Orcas), that decision was reversed in late June, 2023 and the fishery occurred from July 1 to 12, 2023, not sure whether it will resume again at a later date.
  • I have not found any data reporting exploitation rates of Campbell/Quinsam Chinook within BC commercial and sport fisheries, however, given locations where maturing BC Chinook salmon are typically encountered and presumed migration routes, I think its reasonable to assume that these fish are intercepted by sport and commercial fisheries in North Coast Vancouver Island, Haida Gwaii and along the west and southwest coast of the Island. Without data to

4. What could be affecting returns and catches?

Off the top of my head, there are four things that are most likely to be affecting catches of Tyee salmon (in reality, there are many, many more. But for now let’s start with this).

4.1. Juvenile recruitment

Generally, juvenile recruitment refers to the process of small fish transitioning to an older life stage (e.g., an egg hatching into an alevin, a fry becoming a parr or smolt, a smolt maturing into an adult…). According to Thornton et al. 2022 Campbell River Chinook fry emerge in February-March and out migrate as Age-0+ juveniles from March through July. Smaller recently emerged Age-0+ fry are dominant and typically captured from March through early May (37 to 52 m) While larger Age-0+ smolts are less common and move out from May through July (64 to 88 mm). Given that Chinook move to the estuary as fry, lets figure out how many fish should be produced each year. To do this, we need to know:

  • The number of females that return to spawn. Sturham et al. 1999) report that ~60% of Chinook returning to the Campbell River are female. So multiplying the annual escapement values by 0.6 will give us total number females per year. + The number of eggs that each female deposits, which according to (Ewart & Anderson, 2013) has been close to 6,000 eggs-per-female, but now may be closer to 5,700 eggs-per-female.
  • The number of females that spawn successfully. I have no data, so lets assume 100% of females that make it to the river will spawn.
  • The number of eggs that hatch and the number of alevin that survive and emerge from gravel as fry. For ease, we will assume that 10% of eggs will survive the egg-to-fry stage.

So under normal conditions we could expect to see annual fry production ranging from 42,066 to 616,967, with a mean of 271,962 fry.

But abnormal is the new normal, so let’s look at the extremes. High flows through the incubation period can greatly reduce survival by scouring away gravel and eggs. Thornton et al. 2022 observed this in 2016 when very few Chinook (or other salmon) fry out migrated following a large spill event in November 2016 (and to a lesser extent in 2014).

If we assume that flows over 375 cms reduce fry out migration by 90% we see that fry production in years with high flow events is greatly reduced, which will have significant effects on future returns (Note that I have no idea what flows are required to scour gravels in the Campbell or what associated mortality would be, this is purely speculative. AND, mortality rates are likely to vary relative to flow (e.g., 375 cms may result in 75% mortality, 500 cms produces 85% mortality and 600+ results in 90% mortality). If we apply this assumption, we get the figure below, which shows how high flows may reduce juvenile recruitment.

Although major flow event that reduces egg-to-fry survival will reduce escapement, there is a silver lining. Given the age structure of Campbell River Chinook, the resulting reduction in escapement will be spread across multiple years. Arguably, this is a great example of bet-hedging. If all fish returned as Age-5 fish (which would be advantageous biologically since larger fish produce more eggs), then a high flow event could essentially wipe out a full cohort. Having a population returning at different ages ensures that fish return each year, even if something reduces survival of a single age-class or cohort.

Figure 11: Estimated annual Chinook Salmon fry production in the Campbell River, peak flows during incubation period and estimated impacts of high flow events throughout the incubation period.

Well, I am already going out on a limb here. Key takeaway here is that high flow events during sensitive spawning and incubation periods are likely to have a detrimental effect on juvenile survival, which in turn will contribute to a reduction in the number of Tyee that I fail to catch. But, an event that reduces survival will in a single year will not wipe out the run as fish are returning at different age classes.

4.2. Marine Survival

Overall, Ewart & Anderson, 2013 have estimated marine survival in the Campbell River system is approximately 0.003.

Coded wire tag data reviewed by Welch et al. 2022 marine survival of Quinsam Chinook released as fry from 1974 to 2014 ranged from 0.056% in 2007 to 3.3% in 1977, with an overall mean of 0.74% (2014 release group was 0.55%, which is best it has been since survival rate since 1998).

. This stuff is all way more complicated than I want to get into. For now I will pretend that marine survival stable (spoiler, they are not).

4.4. Fishing effort and catchability

For now, I am going to assume effort (# of boats fishing per tide/day) is constant and that catchability (percent of Tyees present that are captured) is stable. In reality, I would guess that effort has likely decreased over time and catchability has likely increased as peoples knowledge, skill and fishing technology have improved over time (not everyone though, I still suck). Either way, without some hard data there is not much I can do with this.

4.5. Environmental Conditions during the Tyee Season

Tyee fishermen may be among the toughest of tough (cough, cough), but even so, windy, wet seasons are likely to result in lower effort and fewer fish than relatively drier, calmer seasons. It is also possible that fish behaviour will change in response to river conditions. Certainly there was a lot of speculation that high flows during the 2022 Tyee season contributed to record low catches.

For now, I have little interest in combing through historic weather data. But, I already have flow data. So let’s see how river flows have varied between seasons.

  • 7.9% of fish will return as Age-3, 44.7% of fish will return as Age-4 fish, 46.1% will return as Age-5 fish and 1.3% will return as Age-6 fish (Sturham et al. 1999).

  • All fish captured in the Tyee pool are actually from the Campbell system.

We can expand this to estimate the number of Tyee salmon that will return if we make even more assumptions!

  • For fun, let’s assume all fish > 900 mm are Tyee Salmon (I know girth is important too, but I dont have girth data) and using the (Sturham et al. 1999) data as a rough guide I will assume that 10% of Age-4 male adults are >900 mm, 25% of Age-5 fish (males and females) are >900 mm and 75% of Age-6 fish are >900 mm.

5. What explains the variability between years?

Note, this is where shit is going to get weird. At this point I am mostly just making shots in the dark and everything should be considered very skeptically.

Off the top of my head there are a couple ways we can approach this:

1.) How many fish should come back based on past on escapement counts and available biological data. Basically, this is just making a bunch of estimates about survival at different life stages and then comparing our predicted returns to what actually returned. It won’t actually tell us anything, but is a fun exercise.

2.) We can look at what factors influenced how many fish were available for capture in the Tyee pool (i.e. how historic conditions may have contributed to observed captures), and/or;

3.) We can look at what factors influenced how returning fish were captured (i.e. conditions during the fishing season).

5.1 How many fish should come back?

We can VERY CRUDELY estimate the number of salmon that should return to the Campbell River if we make a couple of big assumptions:

  • Fecundity is ~5,700 eggs per female (Ewart & Anderson, 2013)

  • Sex ratios are 60:40 female to male using (Sturham et al. 1999) data for Campbell River.

  • Egg-to-fry survival is approximately 0.1, can’t recall where this number came from but its commonly used as a measure of egg-to-fry survival of wild fish (compared to 0.9 for hatchery reared fish). Give results from Thornton et al. 2022 it is likely that egg-to-fry survival in the Campbell is higher.

  • Marine survival (smolt to adult) is approximately 0.003 (Ewart & Anderson, 2013)

  • 7.9% of fish will return as Age-3, 44.7% of fish will return as Age-4 fish, 46.1% will return as Age-5 fish and 1.3% will return as Age-6 fish (Sturham et al. 1999).

  • All fish captured in the Tyee pool are actually from the Campbell system.

We can expand this to estimate the number of Tyee salmon that will return if we make even more assumptions!

  • For fun, let’s assume all fish > 900 mm are Tyee Salmon (I know girth is important too, but I dont have girth data) and using the (Sturham et al. 1999) data as a rough guide I will assume that 10% of Age-4 male adults are >900 mm, 25% of Age-5 fish (males and females) are >900 mm and 75% of Age-6 fish are >900 mm.

If we run these numbers, each female will generate 1.7 offspring, of which 0.14 will be Age-3, 0.76 will be Age-4, 0.79 will be Age-5 and 0.022 will be Age-6. Furthermore, each female will produce 0.24 Tyee salmon. Let’s take a moment to remember that these assumptions are terrible. Larger fish are more likely to produce larger fish, so in reality some fish will produce a decent number of Tyee and others will produce none. But let’s keep it simple for now and assume every fish is able to make an equal number of Tyees

Based on this, each female should produce 1.7 offspring that return to spawn. Which is less than ideal.

Figure 12: Predicted returns of Campbell River Chinook by age-class relative to measured escapement (does not include Quinsam River fish).

Well that’s interesting. There are periods when my predicted returns closely align with actual escapement (most closely from 2003 to 2007, but my values are comparable from 2003 to 2010). This suggests my estimates may not be WAY off but does not confirm they are correct. Other notes:

  • Also clearly periods when my predictions are off! Most notably from 1998 to 2002, 2011-2012, 2014 and 2019 to 2022.
  • There are number of years where something appears to have happened and fish simply did not return (2005, 2011, 2014).
  • There are also years where something positive appears to have happened and far more fish than expected returned to the river (1999 to 2001, 2020).

5.2 How many tyee should be returning?

Let’s look at little closer at how many Tyee salmon may be returning in a given year.If all Tyee salmon were captured each year, we would be actively selecting against large fish, so we would expect to see a rapid and continuous decline in the total number of Tyees returning each year (which I suppose we are). But, I have had the opportunity to snorkel the Campbell River canyon a number of times and have seen spawning Tyee, and in 2022 there were lots of Tyee captured in the river… but that was likely due to higher than usual flows throughout the season. Anyways, all this to say that its unlikely every Tyee is captured in the pool, and the actual number returning to the pool should be at least equal to or higher than the number captured.

Among anglers who have been involved in the club for a long time it is generally believed that most Tyee are Age-6. And it would make sense that larger fish are larger because they spend an extra year in the ocean. If this is the case, then my assumptions below are totally out to lunch (quite likely) as Sturham et al. 1999 data suggest that Age-6 fish represent less than 1% of the total return to the Campbell and Quinsam systems.

Reminder of key assumptions in the plot:

  • 10% of Age-4 fish will return as Tyee.
  • 25% of Age-5 fish will return as Tyee.
  • 75% of Age-6 fish will return as Tyee.